Can Fam Physician. 1985 Apr;31:845-51.
Three hundred and sixty-six patients volunteered for a smoking cessation trial and were randomly allocated to a control group or to three interventions: a single counselling visit to a physician, eight sessions of group health education or eight sessions of group behavior modification. Progress was assessed by smoking diaries, supported by saliva thiocyanate tests, before and after the intervention and six and 12 months later. Only the two group approaches showed a significant improvement compared to the control group immediately after the intervention; these differences were no longer statistically significant six or 12 months later. The group methods proved to be more cost-effective than the physician intervention. However, when different sub-groups were examined, such as heavy or light smokers, a different pattern of results emerged. For very heavy smokers, the physician-led intervention proved almost as successful as the group approaches. Overall quitting results were disappointing, but the programs appear to be more successful at helping people reduce smoking.
366 名患者自愿参加戒烟试验,并被随机分配到对照组或三种干预措施组:一次与医生的咨询访问、八次团体健康教育或八次团体行为矫正。在干预前后以及 6 个月和 12 个月后,通过吸烟日记和唾液硫氰酸盐测试来评估进展情况。与对照组相比,只有两种小组方法在干预后立即显示出显著改善;这些差异在 6 个月或 12 个月后不再具有统计学意义。小组方法证明比医生干预更具成本效益。然而,当检查不同的亚组,如重度或轻度吸烟者时,结果出现了不同的模式。对于非常重度吸烟者,医生主导的干预措施证明几乎与小组方法一样成功。总体戒烟结果令人失望,但这些方案似乎更成功地帮助人们减少吸烟。